Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

--------------------You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers

It's kind of tough, because what if you are reasonably sure somebody is a terrorist but you can't prove it beyond a reasonable doubt? Is it ok to let free knowing they could endanger innocent people?

--------------------1. "After an hour I wasn't feeling anything so I decided to take another..."
2. "We were feeling pretty good so we decided to smoke a few bowls..."
3. "I had to be real quiet because my parents were asleep upstairs..."

Agreed. It's long past time to decide. It can't take that long to check constitutional law on this. Either they are enemy combatants (and thus POWs) or they aren't. I'm too lazy tonight to reread the Constitution. Does anyone here know whether the Constitution assigns the power to designate who is and isn't a POW to POTUS or to SCOTUS?

Yeah, considering how long it has been the gov't should put up or shut.

--------------------1. "After an hour I wasn't feeling anything so I decided to take another..."
2. "We were feeling pretty good so we decided to smoke a few bowls..."
3. "I had to be real quiet because my parents were asleep upstairs..."

IF BushCo lets them go(and don't expect an apology notice to be sent to them) I'm sure he can invent some new law prohibiting the US from being sued if they fuck up and trample someones civil rights. Got to fight the war, dontchaknow!

i saw some general on fox news today say 1000 insurgents, cash and arms from syria were sent to all the trouble spots like fallujah to organise the uprising that the coalition is facing today,exactly when they were sent i didn't hear but thats what they said

would they care:

the militant moslem nations (militants not the peaceful and feel free to tell me which ones they are besides ex-patriot muslims)seem to be caring by sending the said insurgents there.you're just trying to catch me out on the word 'iraq'.the hostage takers whatever race they are, aren't going to like us fighting fire with fire are they?would the actual hostage takers be them afghanis,iranians, iraqis, pakistanis or africans like to see their brothers in arms at guatamala pow camp, held in the same position as the hostages the insurgents have taken?---->

{they want us to free the pows' in exchange for innocent hostages.we only exchange pows' for pows' , one for one ,not one for 100's during battle and thats only when it's a stalemate.an innocent hostage isn't a powIsn't it life in prison for taking a hostage in america}?

---->no i think they would respect that(hate us as normal but respect us none the less) it's their own tactic.remember they feed of our righteousness ie we feed the enemy,don't shoot/hang prisoners,follow the geneva convention(they've studied that book to learn how to fight dirty against the west i'll give you the mail).

they also said pakistan soldiers were getting ready by spreading out over their boarder to catch the fleeing al qaeda members they have given a deadline to surrender (or flee mind you) .could it be that that is a way to send more insurgents under the lie of "we chased them out of pakistan, its not our fault they went straight to iraq armed to the teeth"?

why did muslims in kosovo shoot at american UN peacekeepers yesterday,killing two women and a man after the americans freed them from milosevic?they said it was because they "didn't like what america is doing to iraq"so they kill the very people who are protecting them now and none of them (UN or muslims) have anything to do with iraq.

I think that doing so would stir up more shit than we'd be able to deal with. At least now we have, in most peoples eyes, the moral high ground. Threatening to kill enemy combatants (or what ever we decide that they are) is ludacris. We aren't like "them".